Announcer: "Sleeping with the enemy continues" once again John Quinones. Who killed Janet aboroa. Although this is rarely like cases you see in the movies this has a twist worthy of a screen play. The jury is about to get a surprise. Reporter: The prosecution is about to rest in North Carolina versus raven abaroa when the proceedings come to a screeching halt. Someone in the d.a.'s office discovers a long-forgotten hard drive from Janet's computer. As soon as the state became aware on Thursday morning that these items did exist we immediately brought it to the court's attention, and it was turned over Thursday afternoon. Reporter: The drive is analyzed. Among the many files are e-mails between Janet and her ex from college, Scott hall. Mrs. Abaroa and a former boyfriend of hers. They are e-mailing each other every single day, and they are trying to hide this. Some of the e-mails are flirty, some are sexual in nature. Janet dated him for a very long time. And she was always, I guess you would say flirtatious with Scott. And, you know, she still communicated with him, but when raven moved in she officially ended it with Scott to start dating raven. Reporter: The defense smells a rat. They immediately ask the judge to toss out the case, arguing the state purposely hid this side of Janet to build there case against raven. Withholding those e-mails has allowed the state, through its witnesses, to present a very dishonest portrait of Mrs. Abaroa, a dishonest portrait of my client and a dishonest portrait of their relationship. Let's create a portrait of him as this dominating, controlling, awful person. By doing so that helps us convince the jury, well, no one else could have done it. It has to be him. Reporter: The defense is passionate, but in the end -- The motion for mistrial in the court's discretion is denied. Reporter: The judge believes the state was guilty of nothing more than sloppy record keeping. But with the new evidence, the defense has a face for their intruder theory. Was Scott hall a jealous ex-lover? The defense tried to paint it to be as if she were in some type of relationship with an ex-boyfriend. And you know, could this guy have done this, you know, because that relationship wasn't moving forward. That was, I think, their presentation of a possible suspect. One of the things you talked about in these e-mails was other people not finding out about the e-mails, right? That's correct. And specifically you didn't want your wife to find out about them. Of course not. Let me ask you something Mr. Hall, is this the woman you dated for three years in high school, correct? That's correct. And these text messages are March 3rd, 2005. So less than 60 days later, she was murdered. Is that right? Yes. Did anyone ask you to submit a DNA sample or fingerprints or anything for exclusionary purposes? No, but I'd be happy to do it. But no, no one's asked. Nothing further. Reporter: Maybe no one asked Scott for his DNA because he was in Virginia and nowhere near Durham the night Janet was murdered. Where were you on April 26th, 2005? I was home. And why were you home? I had injured my back the weekend prior so I was pretty much bedridden. I couldn't walk. Nothing further, your honor. Reporter: The defense went on to argue that raven might have been a philanderer and a cad, but that doesn't make him a murderer. They continue to hammer away at the intruder theory, raising the unidentified bloody footprint. We do know that all of raven's shoes were tested that night, and there was no blood on the bottom of those shoes. That is a footprint that is not identified and has not yet been identified. Reporter: But the state shows the jury one crime scene photo in Parr culawhich may explain why a match for that footprint was never found. The defense told you they tested all the defendants shoes. None of these were tested. None of them. And what do you see right there? He had time to plan. He had time to act. He had time to clean up. Reporter: But the defense isn't giving up. They say the state had it in for raven from the beginning, and they hold up Janet's missing hard drive as exhibit "A." Let's talk about what that hard drive represents because it symbolizes as much as anything the prosecution in this case. It shows a pattern of the way the state deals with information when it points away from raven abaroa. Reporter: The defense went on picking the state's case apart bit by bit, blowing up the carefully constructed mosaic. Without the presumption of innocence everything is suspect. When you back up a computer disk that becomes suspect. Leaving the dogs outside somehow that is suspect. Lots of people have the kind of financial problems that they were having. Lots of people when they have their first born buy life insurance. Everything is suspect when you are presumed guilty. Reporter: But the prosecution lands one more blow with the retelling of Janet's last moments on Earth. They say the killer was raven waiting on the second floor. He calls her upstairs. He's waiting for her with the knife. Come up stairs, Janet. Bam. She never saw it coming. She clutches her chest she goes down to her knees at this point. What does he do? He comes up behind her. He's got to finish it. He's already started it, he's going for her neck. She is trying to block it. He stabs through her finger. It ends up making a little mark. She falls face down. That's what this defendant did. Reporter: They list the motives for raven wanting to kill his wife. An unhappy marriage with an unwanted baby on the way and a deep financial hole. Did that $500,000 insurance policy he took out on Janet offer a way out? They again drag out raven's bizarre video where he seems to be hoping for a payday. I need to win the lottery, you know, and if I were to win $3 million I would dedicate $2 million to fighting this. That's what I need, because this fight, you need money, you need -- you need power. Reporter: Both sides rest. It was a dramatic day of closing arguments. Reporter: And after more than five weeks of testimony, the case is now in the hands of the jury. Verdict watch happing now in the raven abaroa murder trial. Reporter: When we come back, a juror brings us inside the deliberation room. We were all pretty unanimous in that the defendant had done some fairly reprehensible things. It was just a matter of whether that was to the level of committing murder. I would just like to state that I didn't receive a fair trial. Reporter: Don't go anywhere.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"id":24917738,"title":"Defense Pushes for Judge to Toss Out Murder Case","duration":"7:35","description":"Act 9: Raven Abaroa's defense team claims the state had it in for him since the investigation's beginning.","url":"/2020/video/sleeping-enemy-defense-pushes-judge-toss-murder-case-24917738","section":"2020","mediaType":"default"}